Trouble logging in?If you can't remember your password or are having trouble logging in, you will have to reset your password. If you have trouble resetting your password (for example, if you lost access to the original email address), please do not start posting with a new account, as this is against the forum rules. If you create a temporary account, please contact us right away via Forum Support, and send us any information you can about your original account, such as the account name and any email address that may have been associated with it.

Well, we've come to a point where -- all this "investment" isn't doing very much to help the economy anyways.

Yeah, most of the issues in the money world today is that investments are no longer invested; they are gambled away on risky bets after leveraging, with money sucked out by hidden fees to make the managers rich, and when things go bad they get government bailouts.

If you want to reward and encourage investments, then do so; but only on real investments that generate GDP. The most profitable investments today generate no GDP at all, so it doesn't help anyone but money managers.

EDIT: This reminded me of a silly children's tale: A married couple opened up a drinks stand on the road side in hopes of enticing thirsty travellers. Yet for the first few hours, only one man bought something. There was only 5 dollars in the money box.
Then the husband got thirsty, and suggested that he would buy a drink from his wife using the 5 dollars. "Why not? Your five dollars is still five dollars", said the wife.
But then the wife got thirsty too, and proceeded to purchase a drink from her husband for the same 5 dollars.
The cycle repeats as it got hotter and hotter...

You can see where I am going with this. When the sun went down and it was time to pack up, they have completed depicted their stock of drinks; but they still only had the same 5 dollars to show for it.

Investment banking is frightening because it is almost like that these days. Trading in things that don't really exist, that don't make anything or produce anything. With dubious valuations. All the while each trade removes fees so there is less money than they started.

Are they even trying to be subtle about this anymore? We're not talking about money being invested in an actual business asset that produces goods or even a service, we're talking about money being invested in an account, in a fund, in a trust and being leveraged to produce more money via interest.

The idea that this is going to do anything but replicate the bad practices of the 08 crisis is absurd. The idea that people like Romney could benefit from this and pay even less effective tax than normal workers (They already pay less currently!) is so infuriating I need to douse my head under cold water. Right now.

Yeah, most of the issues in the money world today is that investments are no longer invested; they are gambled away on risky bets after leveraging, with money sucked out by hidden fees to make the managers rich, and when things go bad they get government bailouts.

If you want to reward and encourage investments, then do so; but only on real investments that generate GDP. The most profitable investments today generate no GDP at all, so it doesn't help anyone but money managers.

EDIT: This reminded me of a silly children's tale: A married couple opened up a drinks stand on the road side in hopes of enticing thirsty travellers. Yet for the first few hours, only one man bought something. There was only 5 dollars in the money box.
Then the husband got thirsty, and suggested that he would buy a drink from his wife using the 5 dollars. "Why not? Your five dollars is still five dollars", said the wife.
But then the wife got thirsty too, and proceeded to purchase a drink from her husband for the same 5 dollars.
The cycle repeats as it got hotter and hotter...

You can see where I am going with this. When the sun went down and it was time to pack up, they have completed depicted their stock of drinks; but they still only had the same 5 dollars to show for it.

Investment banking is frightening because it is almost like that these days. Trading in things that don't really exist, that don't make anything or produce anything. With dubious valuations. All the while each trade removes fees so there is less money than they started.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with trading, because it is an art that has been around since the start of civilisation before "precious" metals were discovered. It is based on the concept of what you want is worth how much to you.

In modern times with the electronic stock exchange, trading made the market more liquid and excessively difficult for rich assholes to hoard supplies through the usage of commodity (future) contracts and international trade allowed the flow of alternative material/goods to supplant normal goods, driving them down once someone starts hoarding.

The problem is with derivatives (portfolio funds), and to a certain extent, equity contracts. Some idiot lawmaker had to legalise putting together a group of stocks and company shares as a package, then selling parts of the package as "low risk as diversification reduces risk of owning individual stocks".

The f***ing problem is that you, the buyers, are not managing the risk, the portfolio manager is, and you don't even personally know the portfolio manager, so how can "diversified risk" be considered "reduced risk" in this case? Our dorsolateral cortexes have been hijacked by some nut promising "financial freedom" and begging you to put your money with him/her, only to abscond with it and spend on luxuries.

Financial freedom does exist. But like any other freedom, it is anything but free; it is a personal thing which one has to get his/her hands dirty for because it belongs and is defined by oneself.

__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.

"Flopped" means failed to pass the Congress before here (e.g. ending oil subsidies). The choice of word is not entirely incorrect but it is deceiving. A few of the fact checks sound more like nitpicking to me.

The so-called "jobs" are short-term and specific, and would mostly be filled by people who already have jobs.
The economic losses to farmland, ecological resources, personal property loss and damage - are enormous.
We *already* get oil/gas from that direction - it goes through other pipes and delivery trucks.

The XL pipeline is pretty much a boondoggle that channels a lot of money into a very few pockets... pockets that show no sign of investing it back in either the corporations or the country.

I have learned that many people will prefer to believe the negative and ignorant opinions they hold of a person or organization because to do otherwise is to INVALIDATE their bias.

Because they do not want to risk being shown to be wrong or stupid or racists or any other form of ignorant incubation, they persist in their negative and unfounded assertions.

I have seen where even tho you explain facts to certain people, and they listen and seem to nod their head in ag4reement, they quickly revert to their ignorance because they simply cannot afford to be wrong.

Sure they will say at that moment and time when talking with you, that you may be right, but until ONE OF THEIR OWN tells them the same thing you say (because your an outsider and cant be trusted or your misguided) they will revert.

Reasonable Jim: The Earth is round here is the proof.

Fearful Bob: OK. Looks like you were right.

Authority Ted: Hey Bob, those round worlder's are at it again. They digitally created pictures of the earth from the so called space shuttle. Don't they know we know the space shuttle can't be real ?

Fearful Bob: Whew... Thank GOD. We are onto their tricks ! *for a minute I was affraid I might be on the wrong side.

As an aside, that is one of my few buttons I think...the Flat Earth Society. More so that the conspiracy theorists about the moon landing...the Flat Earth Society gets me going because I know better and have seen proof from flying in small civilian aircraft. Actually if you go to a high enough lonely mountain you can see the curvature of the Earth.

As an aside, that is one of my few buttons I think...the Flat Earth Society. More so that the conspiracy theorists about the moon landing...the Flat Earth Society gets me going because I know better and have seen proof from flying in small civilian aircraft. Actually if you go to a high enough lonely mountain you can see the curvature of the Earth.

Sometimes people maintain their ignorance deliberately because they know that to prove them wrong would be incredibly expensive... or near impossible.

1. Go back in time to the place and date of Obama's birth.

2. Take a man on a rocket orbit the earth and show him the sphere he denies.

I think if Obama had served in the military, it would have been easier on him to day.

I think a lot of objectors are at him because he is an non-white academic, and they distrust non-white academics (perceived as dangerous intellectuals).

I have heard of gaijin getting cold shoulders in Japan if they speak the language fluently... especially by right wingers.

As an aside, that is one of my few buttons I think...the Flat Earth Society. More so that the conspiracy theorists about the moon landing...the Flat Earth Society gets me going because I know better and have seen proof from flying in small civilian aircraft. Actually if you go to a high enough lonely mountain you can see the curvature of the Earth.

Weren't they some kind of joke? Or did the joke somehow get away from its creators to take on a terrible life of its own?

I have no qualms about it being set back. I don't think it would generate many long-term jobs (unless an environmental disaster happened - then the government would be paying for people to monitor and clean it up). The pipeline would be run by a Canadian company, so most of the money to be made from the project wouldn't even be going to America. Basically, America would be risking its resources, and a Canadian company stands to benefit. It's not that I have anything against Canada, it just seems like a silly thing to push so heavily for that we're willing to accept it even without waiting for environmental assessments and planning to finish their work.

I used to work at an oil plant under manpower, and most of the workers are contractors hiring tons of unskilled labour with a few engineers here and there to direct them.

Either that or they refuse to hire people to shine UV light at the pipes.

__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.